Pentax - Why so expensive?

userage · 12-21-2011, 10:58 AM

So Canon, Nikon and Sony all have a 50mm decently fast AF prime for around £100.

Pentax's 50mm f1.7 goes for more than twice as much as the Canon's, used!

Whats going on? Why so expensive? :/

kenafein · 12-21-2011, 11:15 AM

I bought my FA 50/1.4 for $189 new a few years ago, and now it goes for $359. I don't understand why they had such a huge spike in the price. I can understand exchange rates and inflation, but this is a bit high. The 1.7 is used and highly regarded, the price is set by the community. As far as competing with Nikon and Canon, the Pentax lens is full frame. The Nikon FX lens is $439.00.

userage · 12-21-2011, 11:29 AM

I noticed how the products went much higher than the RRP of when they were released I don't know why though, was hoping someone here could enlighten me.

Could just be that they discontinued it and left a limited amount therefore creating a bigger demand for it. I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though.

DaveHolmes · 12-21-2011, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by userage

I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though.

There are a few here who think they'll have too... Especially if there is amove to full frame...

eddie1960 · 12-21-2011, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by kenafein

I bought my FA 50/1.4 for $189 new a few years ago, and now it goes for $359. I don't understand why they had such a huge spike in the price. I can understand exchange rates and inflation, but this is a bit high. The 1.7 is used and highly regarded, the price is set by the community. As far as competing with Nikon and Canon, the Pentax lens is full frame. The Nikon FX lens is $439.00.

When it was 189 it was drastically under priced (pre Hoya) and needed to be addressed. Any lens of comparable quality and speed is the same or higher priced even now at $359

The loss of the F50 1.7 as a low price alternate was a mistake IMO It wouldn't be sub $200 like the Canon but it is a better lens with a metal mount (versus the plastic on the Canon)

I imagine if FF makes an appearance it may well return in a new lower cost form like the Canon.

the argument (a poor one BTW) is the 35 2.4 is the Pentax APSC variant

**boriscleto** · 12-21-2011, 11:54 AM

What is needed is a DA50/1.7 or 2.0 and a 28/2.8 or 3.5 in the same price range as the DA35/2.4. If they made a plastic mount DA18/3.5 for less than $200 I would buy it in an instant.

johnmflores · 12-21-2011, 12:46 PM

While I loved 50mm on 35mm film, it's an odd duck in the world of APS-C - a bit too long for indoors and a bit too short for outdoors. Recognizing the difference of APS-C, Pentax came out with a cheap DA35 F2.4. I don't have one but everything I've heard about it suggests that it's a good, cheap, all purpose lens.

Here are the reviews:
Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

bimjo · 12-21-2011, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by userage

I noticed how the products went much higher than the RRP of when they were released I don't know why though, was hoping someone here could enlighten me.

Could just be that they discontinued it and left a limited amount therefore creating a bigger demand for it. I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though.

Partly it's economy of scale- how many Canikon 50mm lenses are produced each year vs. Pentax? The more you make (and sell) the less you can sell them for and still make a decent profit.

**boriscleto** · 12-21-2011, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by bimjo

Partly it's economy of scale- how many Canikon 50mm lenses are produced each year vs. Pentax? The more you make (and sell) the less you can sell them for and still make a decent profit.

Canon also knows they are going to sell one to you every other year or so. That's about how long they last before they self-destruct.

bimjo · 12-21-2011, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

Canon also knows they are going to sell one to you every other year or so. That's about how long they last before they self-destruct.

All part of the nefarious marketing plan… and it works.

DaveHolmes · 12-21-2011, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

What is needed is a DA50/1.7 or 2.0 and a 28/2.8

I think a new budget DA50mm f2 with the plastic mount to sit with the FA50 1.4 and an immediate production run of the FA28mm 2.8

Marc Sabatella · 12-21-2011, 07:28 PM

Originally posted by userage

So Canon, Nikon and Sony all have a 50mm decently fast AF prime for around £100.

Pentax's 50mm f1.7 goes for more than twice as much as the Canon's, used!

Whats going on? Why so expensive? :/

Pentax has no cntrol over what people charge for used lenses. Because there is no new 50/1.7, people charge what they can for used ones. But when comparing lenses that all three manufacturers do make - like 50/1.4's, 16-50/2.8, etc - you'll see Pentax is *not* unusually expensive overall. Some lenses Pentax makes happen to be a little more than the others, some happen to be a little cheaper, but on average, they are all about the same.

theunmen · 12-22-2011, 10:48 AM

The Pentax equivalent to a 50 (35 f/2.4) is 150$. And don't believe everything you read on the internet; the cheapo Nikon 50 with ''decently fast AF'' can't even autofocus on entry level bodies and the one 50 that can AF costs roughly 220$.

ducdao · 12-22-2011, 11:05 AM

The bottom line is all comes down to offer and demand.

**Rondec** · 12-22-2011, 01:04 PM

The gap is really the 50 f1.7, cheap-o lens. As others have mentioned, this lens is not really a normal lens on APS-C (which Pentax doesn't have a full frame camera yet). The 50 f1.4s from various companies are all priced fairly comparably and I don't think the FA 50 is over priced for what it is. The DA 35 f2.5 really fits the cheap normal bill, although, it isn't fast enough to fit the role the fast 50 once did. Too bad they didn't make it f1.8 or f2. Then it would be about perfect.

12-21-2011, 10:58 AM	#1
userage Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 198	Pentax - Why so expensive? So Canon, Nikon and Sony all have a 50mm decently fast AF prime for around £100. Pentax's 50mm f1.7 goes for more than twice as much as the Canon's, used! Whats going on? Why so expensive? :/

12-21-2011, 11:54 AM	#6
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	What is needed is a DA50/1.7 or 2.0 and a 28/2.8 or 3.5 in the same price range as the DA35/2.4. If they made a plastic mount DA18/3.5 for less than $200 I would buy it in an instant. Last edited by boriscleto; 12-21-2011 at 12:38 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why is the FA*28-70 so expensive?	Clinton	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	56	08-25-2011 11:31 PM
Just wonder why Pentax is more expensive n US	LFLee	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	19	04-18-2011 10:25 PM
Pentax K-5 in US is more expensive than in...	LFLee	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	10-31-2010 08:01 AM
So you thought Pentax Star lenses were expensive?	SOldBear	General Talk	8	08-20-2009 10:19 PM
Is this the world's most expensive lens? (not Pentax)	Ash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-18-2008 10:58 PM

12-21-2011, 11:15 AM	#2
kenafein Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Southern California Photos: Albums Posts: 4,082	I bought my FA 50/1.4 for $189 new a few years ago, and now it goes for $359. I don't understand why they had such a huge spike in the price. I can understand exchange rates and inflation, but this is a bit high. The 1.7 is used and highly regarded, the price is set by the community. As far as competing with Nikon and Canon, the Pentax lens is full frame. The Nikon FX lens is $439.00.

12-21-2011, 11:29 AM	#3
userage Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 198 Original Poster	I noticed how the products went much higher than the RRP of when they were released I don't know why though, was hoping someone here could enlighten me. Could just be that they discontinued it and left a limited amount therefore creating a bigger demand for it. I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though.

12-21-2011, 11:41 AM	#4
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	Originally posted by userage I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though. There are a few here who think they'll have too... Especially if there is amove to full frame...

12-21-2011, 11:50 AM	#5
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by kenafein I bought my FA 50/1.4 for $189 new a few years ago, and now it goes for $359. I don't understand why they had such a huge spike in the price. I can understand exchange rates and inflation, but this is a bit high. The 1.7 is used and highly regarded, the price is set by the community. As far as competing with Nikon and Canon, the Pentax lens is full frame. The Nikon FX lens is $439.00. When it was 189 it was drastically under priced (pre Hoya) and needed to be addressed. Any lens of comparable quality and speed is the same or higher priced even now at $359 The loss of the F50 1.7 as a low price alternate was a mistake IMO It wouldn't be sub $200 like the Canon but it is a better lens with a metal mount (versus the plastic on the Canon) I imagine if FF makes an appearance it may well return in a new lower cost form like the Canon. the argument (a poor one BTW) is the 35 2.4 is the Pentax APSC variant

12-21-2011, 12:46 PM	#7
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	While I loved 50mm on 35mm film, it's an odd duck in the world of APS-C - a bit too long for indoors and a bit too short for outdoors. Recognizing the difference of APS-C, Pentax came out with a cheap DA35 F2.4. I don't have one but everything I've heard about it suggests that it's a good, cheap, all purpose lens. Here are the reviews: Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

12-21-2011, 01:22 PM	#8
bimjo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pasco, WA Posts: 967	Originally posted by userage I noticed how the products went much higher than the RRP of when they were released I don't know why though, was hoping someone here could enlighten me. Could just be that they discontinued it and left a limited amount therefore creating a bigger demand for it. I hope they bring out a new line of lenses though. Partly it's economy of scale- how many Canikon 50mm lenses are produced each year vs. Pentax? The more you make (and sell) the less you can sell them for and still make a decent profit.

12-21-2011, 02:23 PM	#9
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by bimjo Partly it's economy of scale- how many Canikon 50mm lenses are produced each year vs. Pentax? The more you make (and sell) the less you can sell them for and still make a decent profit. Canon also knows they are going to sell one to you every other year or so. That's about how long they last before they self-destruct.

12-21-2011, 03:02 PM	#10
bimjo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pasco, WA Posts: 967	Originally posted by boriscleto Canon also knows they are going to sell one to you every other year or so. That's about how long they last before they self-destruct. All part of the nefarious marketing plan… and it works.

12-21-2011, 03:27 PM	#11
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	Originally posted by boriscleto What is needed is a DA50/1.7 or 2.0 and a 28/2.8 I think a new budget DA50mm f2 with the plastic mount to sit with the FA50 1.4 and an immediate production run of the FA28mm 2.8

12-21-2011, 07:28 PM	#12
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by userage So Canon, Nikon and Sony all have a 50mm decently fast AF prime for around £100. Pentax's 50mm f1.7 goes for more than twice as much as the Canon's, used! Whats going on? Why so expensive? :/ Pentax has no cntrol over what people charge for used lenses. Because there is no new 50/1.7, people charge what they can for used ones. But when comparing lenses that all three manufacturers do make - like 50/1.4's, 16-50/2.8, etc - you'll see Pentax is not unusually expensive overall. Some lenses Pentax makes happen to be a little more than the others, some happen to be a little cheaper, but on average, they are all about the same.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-22-2011, 10:48 AM	#13
theunmen New Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3	The Pentax equivalent to a 50 (35 f/2.4) is 150$. And don't believe everything you read on the internet; the cheapo Nikon 50 with ''decently fast AF'' can't even autofocus on entry level bodies and the one 50 that can AF costs roughly 220$.

12-22-2011, 11:05 AM	#14
ducdao Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Montreal/Vermont Posts: 2,160	The bottom line is all comes down to offer and demand.

12-22-2011, 01:04 PM	#15
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	The gap is really the 50 f1.7, cheap-o lens. As others have mentioned, this lens is not really a normal lens on APS-C (which Pentax doesn't have a full frame camera yet). The 50 f1.4s from various companies are all priced fairly comparably and I don't think the FA 50 is over priced for what it is. The DA 35 f2.5 really fits the cheap normal bill, although, it isn't fast enough to fit the role the fast 50 once did. Too bad they didn't make it f1.8 or f2. Then it would be about perfect.